I just tried v.buffer in GRASS 6.4 (develbranch) and 7 (trunk). The vitally important "distance=" argument is missing from the GUI.
Michael
Hi.
2009/1/14 Michael Barton <michael.barton@asu.edu>:
I just tried v.buffer in GRASS 6.4 (develbranch) and 7 (trunk). The vitally
important "distance=" argument is missing from the GUI.
I can see it 'optional' tab.
Martin
--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *
2009/1/14 Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com>:
Hi.
2009/1/14 Michael Barton <michael.barton@asu.edu>:
I just tried v.buffer in GRASS 6.4 (develbranch) and 7 (trunk). The vitally
important "distance=" argument is missing from the GUI.I can see it 'optional' tab.
hm, quite hidden, changed in r35405 (devbr6). I will backport to trunk
and relbr64 later.
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
Martin
--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *
On Jan 14, 2009, at 12:41 AM, Martin Landa wrote:
2009/1/14 Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com>:
Hi.
2009/1/14 Michael Barton <michael.barton@asu.edu>:
I just tried v.buffer in GRASS 6.4 (develbranch) and 7 (trunk). The vitally
important "distance=" argument is missing from the GUI.I can see it 'optional' tab.
hm, quite hidden,
So well hidden on my Mac that it's completely invisible.
changed in r35405 (devbr6). I will backport to trunk
and relbr64 later.
Thanks
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
Probably
Michael
Martin
--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *
Hi,
2009/1/14 Michael Barton <michael.barton@asu.edu>:
I can see it 'optional' tab.
hm, quite hidden,
huh, you cannot see 'optional' tab??
Martin
--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
Looking at
http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/browser/grass/branches/
- develbranch_6
- ...
- releasebranch_6_4
I think it looks ok? I don't find it confusing as it is...
Maybe I don't get the point since I am traveling 
Ah, you mean include/version[.in]? It could be done but
then all the web stuff/cronjobs needs to be updated which
is rather painful.
Markus
Hi,
2009/1/15 Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org>:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
Looking at
http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/browser/grass/branches/
- develbranch_6
- ...
- releasebranch_6_4I think it looks ok? I don't find it confusing as it is...
Maybe I don't get the point since I am travelingAh, you mean include/version[.in]? It could be done but
then all the web stuff/cronjobs needs to be updated which
is rather painful.
I know, but on the other hand, it should be done;-) BTW, Hamish already started.
Martin
--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
2009/1/15 Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org>:
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Martin Landa <landa.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
Looking at
http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/browser/grass/branches/
- develbranch_6
- ...
- releasebranch_6_4I think it looks ok? I don't find it confusing as it is...
Maybe I don't get the point since I am travelingAh, you mean include/version[.in]? It could be done but
then all the web stuff/cronjobs needs to be updated which
is rather painful.I know, but on the other hand, it should be done;-) BTW, Hamish already started.
mhh, maybe things should be sync'ed a bit... perhaps I overlooked
the related email(s).
Markus
Hi,
2009/1/15 Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org>:
[...]
I know, but on the other hand, it should be done;-) BTW, Hamish already started.
mhh, maybe things should be sync'ed a bit... perhaps I overlooked
the related email(s).
http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/changeset/35410
Martin
--
Martin Landa <landa.martin gmail.com> * http://gama.fsv.cvut.cz/~landa *
ML:
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
MN:
Ah, you mean include/version[.in]? It could be done but
then all the web stuff/cronjobs needs to be updated which
is rather painful.
if it breaks all the cron jobs we can switch develbranch_6's VERSION back
to 6.4.svn for a while at little cost, and bump it it 6.5 when the time is
better. shrug, no rush there as no new major development should be
happening in 6.5.svn and '6.4.svn' != '6.4.0.svn'.
I guess cron jobs for 6.4 man pages -> website etc should now be updated to
use releasebranch_6_4 too...
Hamish
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Hamish <hamish_b@yahoo.com> wrote:
ML:
BTW, should be devbr6 renamed to 6.5? 6.4.x is used for relbr64.
MN:
Ah, you mean include/version[.in]? It could be done but
then all the web stuff/cronjobs needs to be updated which
is rather painful.if it breaks all the cron jobs we can switch develbranch_6's VERSION back
to 6.4.svn for a while at little cost, and bump it it 6.5 when the time is
better. shrug, no rush there as no new major development should be
happening in 6.5.svn and '6.4.svn' != '6.4.0.svn'.
Well, current break in a sense that people download 6.4.trunk and 6.5 is
inside. But maybe nobody cares.
Indeed, all new development in 7 and stabilization in 6.
I guess cron jobs for 6.4 man pages -> website etc should now be updated to
use releasebranch_6_4 too...
Once back from traveling I can check that. This would dis-insentivate also the
introduction of super new features in GRASS 6 as harder to find
Markus